Timeline for What is the relationship between quantile functions and p-values
Current License: CC BY-SA 2.5
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 30, 2010 at 2:57 | comment | added | Michael Hardy | Assigning a separate p-value to each future observation is a bit strange. Maybe it would make sense if one has a separate null hypothesis for each of them. However.... are you assuming the distribution of each of those is the fitted distribution? That would not take into account uncertainty resulting from the fact that it's fitted based on a finite sample. That's the sort of thing one does when one uses a t-distribution rather than a normal distribution when sampling from a population that is assumed to be normally distributed. | |
| Jun 29, 2010 at 18:52 | vote | accept | awesomo | ||
| Jun 29, 2010 at 17:54 | answer | added | Michael Hardy | timeline score: 1 | |
| Jun 29, 2010 at 17:24 | comment | added | awesomo | I have a sample distribution (to which I fit the gamma distribution) that corresponds to lengths of sequences identified at random (the random variable x is the length of sequence). In my case, longer sequences are highly unlikely to occur randomly, and I am trying to calculate p-values for these long sequences (which in my case appear in the far right tail of the sample distribution). The null hypothesis is that a given sequence was identified by chance, the alternative hypothesis is that the sequence was generated by a different, non-random process. | |
| Jun 29, 2010 at 16:13 | comment | added | Jonathan Kariv | What exactly are you trying to test and against what alternate hypothesis? | |
| Jun 29, 2010 at 13:49 | history | edited | awesomo |
edited tags
|
|
| Jun 28, 2010 at 20:09 | history | asked | awesomo | CC BY-SA 2.5 |